[SML] Subject: Flying Effects / Aerial Dance, Liability, and

[Richard Niederberg]

Duncan,
Well Expressed.
/s/ Richard
_________

On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 8:11 PM, Duncan Mahoney via Stagecraft <
stagecraft at theatrical.net> wrote:

> Damon Gelb asks:
>
> <big snip>
>
> "Would any professionals on the list be willing to
> share statements or documentation to support my claim that flying -
> ANY flying - must and should be handled by a professional flying
> company?"'
>
> If the last line of your question sums up your position, then it's as
> simple as saying "I'm not comfortable or qualified to be doing that" to
> your PTB.  There may or may not be fall out, but if "performer rigging" is
> not in the current job description, it's a pretty big stretch to include in
> "other duties as assigned"
>
> But there's no official industry wide document that says" only
> professionals will do performer rigging" or even one that defines what
> qualifies someone as a " professional performer rigger".  With proper
> training a careful competent theatrical rigger should be able to execute
> simple performer rigging effects.  Being comfortable with doing it is
> another matter.  Learning how to do it artistically takes time and
> experience.
>
> If your PTB convince you to be more comfortable with "DIY performer
> rigging" ("DIY Performer Rigging":  an action which should never be
> preceded or followed by the phrase "hold my beer and watch this"), your
> first stop would need to be Risk Management.
>
> Assuming Risk Management would consider the idea under certain conditions,
> the next step would be to get trained by a professional performer rigging
> company.  There are a few that will do training at either their facility or
> yours, (and on-site training in your own facility is an absolute blast for
> interested students).  This training, and all the associated travel, fees,
> shipping, etc., is expensive but essential if you want to actually "fly" a
> performer.
>
> Then go and buy some very specialized and expensive gear.  Depending on
> how you rig it and what tools are already available in-house, a simple
> "straight line lift" can cost more than a couple thousand dollars for gear.
> There should be some training on how to inspect the gear, that'll cost
> extra.  And the odds that the expensive stunt harness that fits this year's
> performer will also fit next year's performer...are small at best.  Each
> performer rigging effect will need to be budgeted assuming almost all new
> gear.  Over time you'll build up an inventory, but it's gear you would not
> have to purchase if you hired a performer rigging company to do the effects
>
> Bringing performer rigging in-house to save money is a false economy
> unless the producing organization is going to do a lot of flying effects.
> If you want to get into tracked effects, or winches, there's tens or even
> hundreds of thousands of dollars of equipment to buy, maintain, and store;
> equipment that will be rented to you for a fraction of its value if you
> hire a performer rigging company to do the effect.  And then there's the
> issue that adding the duties of performer rigging on top of the other
> duties of a TD is adding more work, which should either come with more pay
> or more help to get the other work done.
>
> But in colleges, we train students to do all sorts of dangerous things;
> dental surgery, nuclear physics, theatrical rigging...  If performer
> rigging is something that your department wants to include in the
> curriculum and expose students to, then properly trained and equipped
> faculty/staff will have to be provided.  If the department is merely
> interested in performer rigging as a service in support of the
> performances, that's another matter entirely.  It will be cheaper to just
> "hire the service" when needed.  And it's not just the gear and insurance
> that is being hired, it's also the depth of experience of the professional
> performer rigger to design a better effect than someone with less
> experience can
>
>  I and most of my staff have had some training in performer rigging.   In
> our case, Risk Management will sign off on an effect if the Safety Office
> will sign off.  We usually have a discussion with the Safety Office about
> the effect, the training the operators will receive, the design factors of
> the various bits of gear, and eventually the Safety Office inspects the
> completed apparatus.  They don't know more about rigging than I do, but
> they do know about risk analysis and are very good at asking questions to
> ensure that we have considered potential problems and contingencies.  Any
> interested Technical Direction and Design students work with us as we rig
> the effect and in some cases are responsible for operating it.  Over the
> years we have done a fair number of suspensions and some straight line
> lifts.  Budgets and time have constrained us from more complicated effects.
>
>
>
> Duncan Mahoney
> Director of Technical Direction
> Associate Professor of Theatre Practice
> University of Southern California School of Dramatic Arts
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> For list information see <http://stagecraft.theprices.net/>
> Stagecraft mailing list
> Stagecraft at theatrical.net
> http://theatrical.net/mailman/listinfo/stagecraft_theatrical.net
>



-- 
/s/ Richard
_________
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://theatrical.net/pipermail/stagecraft_theatrical.net/attachments/20160201/0f0d7bbf/attachment.html>